From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD5EDC07E9B for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 15:35:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45EE5601FD for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 15:35:15 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 45EE5601FD Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id EE2F06B0078; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 11:35:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id E92F06B0080; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 11:35:14 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id D5CE06B0081; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 11:35:14 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0176.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.176]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B089D6B0078 for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 11:35:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin09.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39DBC211C9 for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 15:35:14 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78328932948.09.7D70AA3 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 509F150000A3 for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 15:35:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=JT89CnNztpCRm65snzgKJDmEIG8nalFqjLQsFNStPn4=; b=CQHtJctBB09VUQakzJ4Zed/6+6 2S4fgUhvBLr8kRtshzINIoCaVYZ0YeSX9k72rdH+zeF5RjO5uVwJFpEIz9F2RnGXfUxS2vpcYJm2p 2ApDsBi1IVviZ0u0Q1u9DpMB2IJDTztTne1FeYdrQf/RLWAPdrTVdqNAzR298QU6GtKioXRo+KMmd QCqQiE7AhpySbr2VQR9RKCfTjsEAv8x9Rqztjl6jZmWssJ8rXpLcDbzOtxLtzACgR5V6LdfmkRgjO KIZ1NZSEZt5wfW6DcpeifPq8Hj0wJrA/SQouWKiEYPF8vBGmFZ4y6eO6uGUUdLPBLOxfnQdr0kdL9 txtEHolA==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1m0Qag-00AMmO-JJ; Mon, 05 Jul 2021 15:33:10 +0000 Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2021 16:32:58 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML , Mel Gorman , Christoph Hellwig , Nicholas Piggin , Hillf Danton , Michal Hocko , Oleksiy Avramchenko , Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/vmalloc: Use batched page requests in bulk-allocator Message-ID: References: <20210705145547.41206-1-urezki@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210705145547.41206-1-urezki@gmail.com> Authentication-Results: imf04.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=CQHtJctB; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf04.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org X-Stat-Signature: x64xz8gadppi3tefe61661gb9556eo6o X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 509F150000A3 X-HE-Tag: 1625499313-561179 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 04:55:47PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote: > + if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp)) > + cond_resched(); How does one call vmalloc() with gfp flags that _don't_ allow blocking? They have to allow a GFP_KERNEL allocation of the page tables. So I think this should be an unconditional cond_resched().